Venezuela’s Stunning Election Provides a Historic Opportunity for Diplomacy

Two weeks after its presidential election, Venezuela is still in crisis, with a humiliated government that has broken diplomatic ties with numerous countries and is repressing the population—not just politicians but human rights activists and community leaders as well. The government brags that 2000 have been arrested and has called its efforts “Operation Knock Knock,” releasing slick and dramatic videos of detentions. It has also tried to block social media use, with only moderate success. It seeks to silence and intimidate a population it knows does not believe its claims to have won. 

Amid this turmoil, the presidents of Colombia, Brazil and Mexico have emerged as the key players that could determine the direction the conflict takes. They have each been clear on the need for full transparency and on August 1 released a statement reaffirming that position. It is hard to exaggerate the importance of their role for Venezuela and the region. Their efforts need to be supported.

While Venezuela has been in crisis almost constantly over the eleven years that Nicolás Maduro has been in power, it is worth taking a pause to think about what is different this time around.

First, over the past year, the Venezuelan opposition has done exactly what diplomats and experts have asked of it. It has energetically participated in elections despite their being unfare, with key figures disqualified, others arrested or pursued, a largely censured media, and widespread abuse of state resources. Venezuelan citizens also did their part, turning out massively, against the odds and despite their doubts, generated a “stunning election.” What they have done is an important example of how to use politics —even amid an unfair playing field— to fight an authoritarian government.

Second, at no time in the past twenty-five years of Chavismo has an electoral result faced such widespread discredit, both among the population and the international community. Calls for transparency have come not only from geopolitical rivals but also from typically moderate multilateral institutions like the United Nations and the European Union; Norway, the country leading negotiations since 2019; the Carter Center, a non-governmental observation organization endorsed by the Maduro government; and even Maduro’s traditional leftist allies —Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil.

The table is set for a historic diplomatic effort by these three countries — the biggest democracies of Latin America, together accounting for more than half of its population. There have been announcements of a virtual meeting between these three presidents and Maduro. Achieving any kind of solution will be difficult as there is virtually no overlap between the positions of the Maduro and Machado.

And the positions of these three countries are themselves complex. López Obrador is in his last months in office and will leave with high approval ratings. It is unlikely he will risk that with a diplomatic venture that is not entirely consistent with his traditional emphasis on non-intervention in the “internal affairs” of other countries. Gustavo Petro needs Maduro’s support for its peace negotiations with the Ejercito de Liberación Nacional (ELN). And Brazil has important economic interests in Venezuela.

If and when the meeting of presidents happens, the three presidents need to make clear to the Maduro government that its legitimacy is at an all-time low and that continuing to deny the election result will only exacerbate its governance crisis and further its diplomatic isolation. The government needs to negotiate a way forward with the opposition and seize the opportunity provided by the different actors willing to facilitate a solution.

The opposition, led by María Corina Machado and Edmundo González Urrutia, needs to recognize that legitimacy without control of institutions means very little — there’s no appetite in the international community for a repeat of Juan Guaidó’s interim government. They must also understand that a robust return of sanctions is unlikely. While the Biden administration may respond, it won’t be a return to maximum pressure, and even a second Trump administration would not likely change that. The opposition should leverage their current position to negotiate a solution that continues the path to democratization, even if it doesn’t give them everything a full electoral victory should.

The U.S. has done the right thing in walking back what looked like a recognition of Edmundo Gonzalez as president. Reports that the U.S. is willing to negotiate an amnesty of U.S. indictments against Maduro and the others suggest they are working in the right direction. It is also right to value that these three countries are taking the lead.

It is now incumbent upon Lula, Petro and AMLO to support the sovereignty of the Venezuelan people. Not doing so would not only condemn the Venezuelan people and the region to continued crisis, it would undermine electoral politics as the preeminent means of conflict resolution in the region for decades to come. The Venezuelan opposition and population rose to the challenge and played the electoral game, despite an uneven playing field. They cannot be abandoned and their struggle must be supported.

Assiduous, creative diplomacy and effective support for a solution would show that these three countries’ long-term valuation of non-intervention is based on a concept of national sovereignty as the citizenry’s right to choose its government, not as a government’s right to abuse its citizens.